Measure Success in Years

I was sitting in my office today when I heard a noise at the door. I looked out see a man standing there. In fact, he looked like he was getting ready to leave. So I opened the door and introduced myself.

What followed was a fascinating and encouraging conversation that seemed to go on for almost an hour (though I didn’t look) and could have continued all day for all I cared.

This man had been raised in River Rouge as a Jew by adoptive parents who agreed (in accordance with the laws) to raise him as a Jew. He was invited as a young teenager to some Bible studies on the OT, and then was invited to stay for some Bible studies on the NT. He was converted to Christ.

Pastor O. H. Williams then befriended the parents and on New Years Eve of 1951 (if I recall correctly), the son and both parents were baptized as a profession of their faith in the Messiah—Jesus Christ.

Today, this man is a faithful member of his church in Massachusetts, and was recently elected as an elder. He quizzed me to see if we were still solid in doctrine and faithful in the gospel. We talked at length about the church and its more recent history, about people and community, and about the gospel around the world, particularly in Asia where this man had worked in international business for much of his adult life.

He was back for his wife’s high school reunion and wanted to stop by to look at the building.

In the process, he encouraged this pastor to remember to measure success in  years—not days, not weeks, not even months.

So thanks, Mr. Brownson, for your time today and for your life all these years.

And thanks Reverend Williams, for your sixteen years of faithful ministry that still bears fruit more fifty years later.

Sign Me Up

I received an advertisement for a Christian college today. It had a lot of pictures in it, along with some words here and there.

What particularly caught my attention was the page of benefits that included (and I quote): Sunbathing for women students. (Italics in the original … or at least in the copy of the original that I received. I am not sure if the other stack of advertisements has this line in it or not.)

So what’s my point?

Nothing other than that I find it interesting that an advertised benefit of a Christian liberal arts college is “Sunbathing for women students.”

I suppose that might be a deal-breaker for some. (“I would go to that other school but I can’t lay out in the sun there.”)

Weird …

Now, lest you misunderstand, I am not opposed to women laying out to get a tan. All other things equal, I like a little color. I do wonder about the possibilities for the men however. Is there no sunbathing for men?

And I do wonder why that is listed as a benefit. Perhaps they have done the marketing studies that show sunbathing for women students is high on the list of criteria for Christian women looking for higher education.

Weird, that’s all.

Drunkenness, Prayer, and the Man of God

I was recently listening to V. Phillips Long lecturing on Old Testament history. In discussing Hannah’s prayer in 1 Samuel, he noted how interesting it was that Eli, the man of God, could not tell the difference between a heavy heart crying out to God and drunkenness, and his presumption was drunkenness.

What does that say about the state of the nation of Israel, the atmosphere at the feasts, and the spiritual discernment and leadership of Eli?

I am not sure since the Bible does not tell us, but it sure does not look good.

Apparently, drunkenness at the feast was a fairly common occurrence for Eli to presume that Hannah was drunk. And Eli seems to be a pretty poor excuse for a priest, at least at some levels. He failed to hear and recognize the voice of God, which was infrequent in those days (1 Sam 3:1ff.). He failed to lead his sons either as a priest over them or as a father (1 Sam 2).

What to make of Eli’s confusion between prayer and drunkenness? Not sure, but it sparks some thinking for me.

Who is a Faithful Fundamental Man?

A recent article on a fundamentalist mailing list says,

If a man finds fault with faithful fundamental men and claims that they go too far in regard to biblical separation, he is in the shadow of new evangelicalism. The ruse may take the form of a declaration that the men being criticized are too narrow and that the fault-finder is the true Champion of The Cause. Any man who thinks a holy purity in position for the Gospel should be balanced against a pragmatic viewpoint is leading his people down the path to compromise.

Similarly, beware of the man who breaks fellowship with sound separatist brethren on the supposed basis of "other issues." He may claim, "We stand in the same place doctrinally, but our disagreements are on other non-doctrinal or secondary issues." If I were you, I would press the man for specific, clear details of exactly what issues are at stake. Cut into him here and you may find him bleeding the green ooze of new evangelicalism.

It would be nice to “press [this] man for specific, clear details of exactly what issues are at stake.” It would be interesting to know how this man defines “faithful fundamental men.” It may well be that that is a synonym for “people who draw the lines exactly where I do.” This man gives no biblical arguments. In fact, his whole article contains exactly two biblical references, neither of which have to do with separation.

This, friends, is troubling.

The fact is that many who are considered “faithful fundamental men” aren’t. And many who aren’t considered “faithful fundamental men” are.

For too many, the “shadow of new evangelicalism” has little to do with theology and the Bible. It has to do who has the pedigree, “the card” as someone recently expressed it.

This is all too typical, unfortunately.

The guy makes a good point here and there, but then throws in this kind of stuff to try to paint some lines and pretend like he is bold for the truth.

The truth is that he may merely be a schismatic.

In the Diner

Things are quiet these days.

The long days of summer are shortening. The leaves have already started to change in a few trees. Before long the sweaters and coats will come out. The snow will fly. And then before we can blink, 2010 will be here.

The radio is on belting out “I would do anything for love.”

What a statement about the nature of humanity … We are looking for love and will pay any price to get it.

Unfortunately, very few people know what love is. Love is, for most, about feeling and falling (in love).

And people will sell their souls (and much less) to get it.

Sometimes a husband or wife will say, “I will do anything to get him (or her) to love me.” That is always a sign of idolatry. “Love” is more important than obedience. Obedience can be traded for “love.”

But love is not worth anything. Doing anything for love will get you problems every time.

I am reminded of John 4:10:  In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins.

Into this simple statement John packs a boatload of truth about the nature of love. We know love by looking at what God did. And he didn’t do “anything” for love. In fact, there are some things he refused to do—like overlooking sin, compromising his own holy character, allowing sin to go unpunished.

He rather took the initiative to confront sin, and to bear the cost of sin himself.

So next time you think about love, think about Jesus on the cross. That is real love.

But be warned: It may not feel good.